IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OPSAWG] Fwd: Alternate Tunnel Encapsulation for Data Frames in CAPWAP

"Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com> Mon, 24 February 2014 09:03 UTC

Return-Path: <dromasca@avaya.com>
X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D6DB1A03DE for <opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Feb 2014 01:03:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.447
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.447 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5KGbnR0kww13 for <opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Feb 2014 01:03:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com (de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.71.100]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D5FD1A0834 for <opsawg@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Feb 2014 01:03:00 -0800 (PST)
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ai4FAOAJC1OHCzIm/2dsb2JhbABZgmUhO1fAGU+BFBZ0giUBAQEBAwEBAQ8LHTEDCwwEAgEIDQQBAwEBCxQJBycLFAMGCAIEAQ0FCBqHYwEMmnerOBMEjjMxBwaDHoEUBJ8kizeDLYIq
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,533,1389762000"; d="scan'208";a="44020008"
Received: from unknown (HELO p-us1-erheast-smtpauth.us1.avaya.com) ([135.11.50.38]) by de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 24 Feb 2014 04:02:58 -0500
Received: from unknown (HELO AZ-FFEXHC01.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.58.11]) by p-us1-erheast-out.us1.avaya.com with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-SHA; 24 Feb 2014 03:49:50 -0500
Received: from AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com ([fe80::6db7:b0af:8480:c126]) by AZ-FFEXHC01.global.avaya.com ([135.64.58.11]) with mapi id 14.03.0174.001; Mon, 24 Feb 2014 10:02:55 +0100
From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com>
To: Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@gmail.com>, "opsawg@ietf.org" <opsawg@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [OPSAWG] Fwd: Alternate Tunnel Encapsulation for Data Frames in CAPWAP
Thread-Index: AQHPMQgOMcucR8J9lU6LxtXzV9nEfZrD5BqAgAAAlICAADV80A==
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 09:02:55 +0000
Message-ID: <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA2E4350C1@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com>
References: <4ED2E36A22261145861BAB2C24088B4320F5A67C@xmb-aln-x09.cisco.com> <53040210.4090709@gmail.com> <CAKcc6AcgY59X5+6MNyikXSuE0zfeo4VC+Ru-6AJ3YexTjJb8mQ@mail.gmail.com> <5D36713D8A4E7348A7E10DF7437A4B923AE0AF70@nkgeml512-mbx.china.huawei.com> <530AEA1D.3000008@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <530AEA1D.3000008@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [135.64.58.45]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/opsawg/coEYwCv2yzOhu6Ow9ZgS6asUAYg
Cc: "mmanig@gmail.com" <mmanig@gmail.com>, Dorothy Stanley <DStanley@arubanetworks.com>
Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Fwd: Alternate Tunnel Encapsulation for Data Frames in CAPWAP
X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List <opsawg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/opsawg>, <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/opsawg/>
List-Post: <mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg>, <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 09:03:03 -0000

Hi,

I understand the need and I support discussing this work in OPSAWG. 

This being said - the change proposed by this document looks like a significant addition to the CAPWAP architecture. I personally need to do more reading to understand how it fits into the current architecture, how it impacts existing WTPs and ARs, and whether there is a need for a migration or coexistence plans in existing deployments of CAPWAP (if such deployments exist). Function of the responses this may or may not represent more the usual 'incremental development' we do in OPSAWG. I would like to hear also the opinions of IEEE 802.11 experts and of folks who were involved in the original CAPWAP work ( I copied Dorothy and Mani, there are more)

Thanks and Regards,

Dan


> -----Original Message-----
> From: OPSAWG [mailto:opsawg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Melinda
> Shore
> Sent: Monday, February 24, 2014 8:44 AM
> To: opsawg@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Fwd: Alternate Tunnel Encapsulation for Data Frames
> in CAPWAP
> 
> We have not yet put out a call for adoption.  At this point we're trying to get a
> handle on relevance and quality.  To that end, discussion is very useful,
> statements of support less so.
> 
> Melinda
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OPSAWG mailing list
> OPSAWG@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email